Hamas strike on Israel - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

I explained the difference months and months ago.

There is no defence to the accusation of war crimes against Hamas (unless you argue that the kidnapping of hostages did not happen and they went willingly, which I think even you wouldn't stoop that low to). As a non-State actor, the taking of hostages is a warcrime and I don't think there is anyone who is suggesting otherwise, but correct me if I am wrong, but there is no debate on that issue. The only issue is whether some people actually support the continuation of the war crimes by Hamas, and unfortunately, it seems that there are a few.

For Israel, there are defences available to the accusations, whether that be warnings provided or legitimate acts of self-defence etc. Whether or not I believe that those defences stand up to scrutiny is a different point, but the mere fact of the defences being available means that it is up to a truly independent court in a hearing to decide on those points (and not me). I believe that at least some of the Israeli actions (as opposed to all of the Hamas actions) will be found to be war crimes, whether that is as directed by the top army brass or as a result of wildcat action in the field remains to be found by the court. I could be wrong, and no actions of Israel will be found to be war crimes and that the rationale of self-defence will prevail. As for the usage of WMDs, or of genocide, I think that Israeli actions fall short of the legal definitions. However, ultimately, that is for a court to decide. All of that is legally to be determined, and my views, as stated on the legal points, say nothing on what I believe to be morally right or wrong.

War is a terrible thing, is the only thing I will say.

That's a good post, but it isn't addressing my question at all - I'm not asking you to judge the legality of those acts.

Do you personally condemn the Israel's actions, mentioned in my post? You are allowed to have an opinion on things outside of what is legal or not - every member of the human race exercises these opinions on a daily basis, and I'm sure you have no problem doing so on other topics.

Why don't you feel you can answer that post straightforwardly?

deleted.

You don't believe that it will end the Israeli aggression, I believe it gives Trump the reason to stop Netanyahu.

Trump's plan is only partially revealed. His doctrine is to pull in America's horns, but exercise power through threat, not through action. That means taking over Gaza is a partial bluff. He won't put American troops on the ground, he won't pay for a single reconstruction (though Trump companies will get concessions). What he wants, and what he is getting (see the summit in Saudi), is an Arab plan to pay for and to reconstruct Gaza in a way that doesn't pose a threat to Israel and that ensures Israel's security and peace. Saudi will normalize relations with Israel, so will more of the Arab world and the EU, Iran will be neutered, Hamas will be defunded and rendered impotent and all will be forgotten about what Israel did.

Yea as another poster pointed out, UN deems them as you are thinking, but different bodies have different definitions. What Israel have used numerous times in this conflict does meet the WMD definitions of the FBI and US homeland defence, and then some. But yes, nuclear etc is prob what comes to mind for most people tho - wasn't trying to mislead in that regard.

Given how their 2000ibs bombs have been used against civilians multiple times in open ground i.e to ensure maximum casualties, I'm happy to keep that wording, the mass devastation they caused is evident.

Israel under the Geneva Convention is also prohibited from seizing land and building illegal settlements so I'd say you can't really pick and choose the parts you'd like. Anyway if you could explain some of the following to me:

• If Palestine was a state, does that mean that all Hamas held hostages would then be classified as administrative detainees and therefore become legal to hold indefinitely?
• As a state actor under the Geneva Convention doesn't Israel have a duty of care to its prisoners and therefore ensure that none of them are; tortured (neither mentally of physically, like here, here and here) nor killed under their care.
  • "I went into jail with two legs, and I returned with one leg" - linky
• Many on here have reliably informed us that Hamas started this war on October 7th 2023, but it seems that Israel had over 1000 of the aforementioned "administrative detainees" (I much prefer that term) back in April 2022. Are these prisoners of war?

You'll have to explain this to me like I'm 5 cause I'm not well versed in all the legalities of this but it would seem to me that Israel tends to hide behind legal jargon to allow it continue its occupation. I'm sure some others on here would appreciate light shed on it too.

You completely avoided the question yet again. Look for the April 2022 reference.

Humans have chosen to organise themselves in nation states with rules of war to apply to conflicts etc. In those rules, a lesser status is conferred on non-state actors. We on this island have experience of that with groups like UFF, PIRA, RIRA, UDA, INLA, UVF etc. which have the same legal status as Hamas.

Why are you not answering my question directly, and going on with this stuff? It is absolutely bizarre. To put it in simple simple terms, I'm asking you what time it is, and you are telling me how a watch works.

When you asked me if I condemned Hamas holding hostages, you weren't asking me if I thought what they did was illegal. And remember, I went to the bother of replying to you honestly. You owe me an honest response and for the life of me I can't understand why, unless you are under some duress, you can't provide it. If you agree with Israeli actions just say it, and stand behind your beliefs.

Do you personally condemn Israel states actions for the below?

Do you condemn Israel for using weapons of mass destruction against civilian populations, it politicians for using language of mass bloodshed and dehumanisation of Palestinians, for bombing schools and hospitals, for withholding food and water, destroying farmland, overwhelmingly killing women and children, and for formulating a plan to remove a people from a land - whose lineage goes back thousands of years - in order to ethnically cleanse them from the region?

I don't agree anything I wrote is through the lens of Hamas. Every thing I have said is verifiable, and was written under the knowledge that this was done to civilians. Do you think it is all lies?

If you disagree with my definition of WMD's -which I checked against verifiable sources - and want to go with the UNs, that's fine - replace it with 2000 pound bombs.

In your language, not mine, what specific actions that Israel have carried out do you condemn, with regard to their treatment of Palestinian civilians during this war?

Hey @blanch152

Why is Hamas, a non-state actor, morally expected to honour an agreement that the Israelis, a state actor, legally violated?

" The current standoff stems partly from Hamas’s accusation that Israel has not upheld its promises for the first phase of the cease-fire. Israel was required to send hundreds of thousands of tents into Gaza, a promise that Hamas says Israel has not kept. Speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, three Israeli officials and two mediators said that Hamas’s claims were accurate."

From either a personal/legal POV?

Nice try but no, that's not what I said.

I've consistently advocated for the release of all hostages. But back to the point I made, do you think releasing all the hostages from Gaza will immediately result in a complete cessation of the Israeli campaign?

hold Israel to account for their violations internationally

So, when do you think Netanyahu and Gallant are going to attend The Hague and answer the arrest warrant for War Crimes?

They're a state actor. It's (edit) potentially (/edit) legally justifiable.... apparently….

Amazing bit of logic there.